Global supply chain regulatory compliance has become more important than ever before because of the confluence of a number of factors. As globalization becomes inevitable and inescapable, the global supply chain is one of the core arenas in which it plays out. The outgrowth brought about by globalization, namely outsourcing, has further increased the need for global supply chain regulatory compliance.

Global supply chain regulatory compliance has now become something on which organizations cannot compromise. Any shipment of any item that reaches foreign shores can get rejected if it has not met global supply chain regulatory compliance. Such a consignment could even get labeled as counterfeit. This explains the importance and need for global supply chain regulatory compliance. Being in global supply chain regulatory compliance means adhering to even the local laws of the foreign country into which goods and products are exported.

Governments have become more stringent

As a result of these trade and technological developments; governments all around the world without exception are jumping on the bandwagon to formulate laws that apply to the supply chain industry. For most governments, global supply chain regulatory compliance is a must. They are becoming extremely strict in enforcing these laws and are handing out severe punishments to businesses and organizations that are lax in enforcing global supply chain regulatory compliance. Most countries are legislating laws regarding global supply chains almost exclusively, in a way that other political acts are framed. This has pushed the need for global supply chain regulatory compliance further.

Other related developmentsAs technologies advance in the global supply chain, many developments in auxiliary and supplementary fields have hastened global the push for supply chain regulatory compliance requirements. For example, heavy paperwork, which used to be hallmark of most merchandising businesses, has made way for automation. Global supply chain regulatory compliance has to take factors such as these into consideration.

Other developments in allied areas such as intellectual property rights have gone on to strengthen the role of global supply chain regulatory compliance. As countries demand greater protection for their intellectual property products, they use global supply chain regulatory compliance as an instrument to enforce these, when these products concern exports.

In addition, there could also be other critically important issues in global supply chain regulatory compliance that may not be related to any of these, but can play a decisive role in disrupting global businesses. Think of natural disasters such as the Fukushima earthquake or the many natural disruptions such as hurricanes in South and North America. These could throw businesses out of gear. Global supply chain regulatory compliance is a kind of insulation against the uncertainties caused by events such as these.

In other words, global supply chain regulatory compliance should leave no stone unturned. There is no scope for compromise of any kind in implementing global supply chain regulatory compliance provisions.

Items that go into global supply chain regulatory complianceMeeting global supply chain regulatory compliance requirements means having to take care of a number of ingredients. Some of these are:

Upcoming crucial global supply chain regulatory compliance regulation in the USSeveral legislations aimed at bringing about global supply chain regulatory compliance are in place. However, at this point of time, a really crucial global supply chain compliance regulation that could play a major role in the US in the coming years is the Automated Commercial Environment (ACE).

In a nutshell, this U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP)-mandated regulation aims to bring in place a single portal which will make information on imported goods flow electronically from the businesses themselves right to the respective departments or agencies that require and handle them. The ACE is aimed at making import and export related work paperless, while also seeking to become a major facilitator of trade.

Today we have the pleasure of celebrating the fact that we have reached the milestone of 200+ followers on WordPress. Since we started this blog, we have had such a great time connecting with everyone. we never expected to actually to connect with other people in the blogging community.

we are so incredibly thankful for each and every one of you who follows and comments on my blog posts. Please know that!

Registering and maintaining combination products in the US and the EU is a bit tricky, because these are disparate markets that are governed by different sets of regulations which are independent of each other. So, any business that wants to market combination products into the US or the EU must be completely aware of the nature and meaning of all the regulations. Such businesses need to understand the nuances of the regulatory expectations and do what it takes to meet these.

Professionals and organizations that work in these areas must familiarize themselves with the existing regulations and their latest updates. This is the foundation to ensuring that their products comply with regulatory requirements and meet quality standards, which ensures that the consumer consumes products that are of the set scientific standards.

The regulations in the two markets have evolved differently. The fact that the regulatory agencies in the two markets, namely the US FDA and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) work to ensure the quality of drugs and thus the wellbeing of their consumers is the commonality between the two.

While the US FDA is a centralized agency that regulates food and medicinal products across the vast US market; the EMA, synchronizes the regulations of the 28 countries that are members of the European Union. While the FDA was primarily created to be a consumer protection agency; the regulations from the EMA came about to harmonize the commercial and technological interests of the Member States.

The EU’s new update

In September 2016, the EU, through its two major legislative organs -the European Commission and the European Council, reached a compromise on a major area concerning combination products. Reached four years after a deal was made; the compromise relates to medical devices and invitro diagnostic (IVD) devices.

High risk combination devices, such as implants, will from now be assessed and authorized by the EMA. Brought in to replace the existing EU legislation on medical devices and in-vitro diagnostics; the new regulation seeks to make these products more consistent and uniform in terms of their assessment and approval process across the EU.

Thorough and sound learning of the US and EU regulations on combination products

This is the case of just one regulation in the EU concerning combination products. When the regulations and their updates from both the US and the EU are taken together, a regulatory professional or anyone in manufacturing is up against a mountain. It is to help gain clarity on this wide array of topics that GlobalCompliancePanel, a leading provider of professional trainings for the areas of regulatory compliance, will be organizing a two-day seminar.

This seminar, which is aimed at giving professionals who work in areas concerning regulation in the combination products area, will have Salma Michor, founder and CEO of Michor Consulting Schweiz GmbH, as the Director.

Over two days of intense learning, Salma will offer a thorough understanding of the complexities involved in the regulations about combination products in the EU and the US. She will offer in-depth explanation of all the relevant regulations and guidelines. She will reinforce this learning by offering real life examples of how to register and maintain various types of combination products.

Salma will also help participants explore Interfaces, at which Change Management and LCM will be taken up for explanation. Other important aspects relating to the subject of combination products, namely compliant safety reporting for combination products and documentation requirements and interfacing, will be described in detail at this session.

Over the two days of intense learning, Salma will cover the following areas:

What the FDA’s recent guidance documents covering GMP requirements for Phase I products have done is to significantly reduce a few of the complexities that early phase products are typically against. These guidance documents are in addition to those that cover the CMC sections for IND submissions at Phase I.

These new guidelines appear to remove the need to follow GMPs for Phase I products; yet, this need persists in the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. So, what can be said is that the need for GMP requirements for Phase I products has only been altered, not done away with. The nature of the investigational drug and the extent of the study that is planned will now determine the nature and extent of GMP-related activities.

A training session that will give complete understanding of these aspects

Steven S. Kuwahara, Founder and Principal, GXP BioTechnology LLC, will offer complete clarity on all these points of GMP and regulatory expectations for early IND products at a two-day seminar that is being organized by GlobalCompliancePanel, a leading provider of professional trainings for the areas of regulatory compliance. Please visit GMP and Regulatory Expectations for Early IND Products to enroll for this seminar.

This seminar has been pre-approved by RAPS as eligible for up to 12 credits towards a participant’s RAC recertification upon full completion.

Advice on the GMP guidance document

At this seminar, Dr. Kuwahara will review the GMP guidance document and discuss how it may be integrated with the recommendations of the guidance documents on CMC requirements. It will be a one-source course at which the regulations and guidelines that apply to early phase products will be presented. In a few cases, these may not be regulations, but needs that, if met, will increase the efficiency of activities as a product proceeds through the development process. Dr. Kuwahara will present these items in the order of product development starting from the point of R & D activities and culminating in the completion of Phase 2 clinical trials.

Any pharmaceutical personnel who must deal with products both in early and later phases of development, will find this presentation highly valuable, as it will make them aware of the regulatory requirements that will affect operations dealing with these products. The modifications to the GMPs for early phase products have altered the GMPs in such a way as to reduce requirements to allow more efficient work. At the same time, some of the things that may appear to have changed, have not, and personnel in the pharmaceutical sector should be aware of this. This is the learning that Steven will emphasize at this seminar. Directors, Managers and Supervisors in Regulatory Affairs, Quality Assurance and Quality Control will get a grasp of these aspects.

The market for medical devices in Japan is pretty huge. It ranks third in the world after the US and the EU. At just over $ 35 billion a year, which is characterized by an annual growth rate of 3-4 percent; it is far bigger than the markets in the neighborhood, such as China, Malaysia, Singapore and even Australia. Its market for medical devices is comparable to those of Europe and North America. Some of the reasons for this huge market are:

The infusion of new technologies into the field of medical devices, which pushes up costs initially

The high proportion -nearly a quarter of the entire market -of imported medical devices, especially from the US, which introduce sophisticated, technology-driven products of higher price into the market

Japan’s classification system of medical devices, which classifies these products into Class I, Class II, Class III and Class IV; varies from that of the US or the EU. Adherence to Japanese Industrial Standards, which define industry-wide safety and performance requirements, is mandatory for medical devices.

In addition, the Japanese medical devices market has been undergoing a few major changes. Medical device manufacturers have to deal with strict new package insert requirements. The Marketing Authorization Holder (MAH) system, which deals with licensing rules, have changed, requiring a new MAH License category for In Vitro Diagnostic (IVD) devices. New changes have been made into several other aspects of medical devices. These include:

Medical device manufacturers have to also reckon with expanded scope of third party certifications, and comply with rules for Software as a Medical Device and for transferring pre-market certifications.

Full explanation of the regulatory requirements

All these factors make it very important for medical devices that want to enter the Japanese market, to get a thorough understanding of the regulatory requirements. Complete understanding of all these and more will be imparted at a two-day seminar from GlobalCompliancePanel, a leading provider of professional trainings for all the areas of regulatory compliance.

David R. Dills, Regulatory & Compliance Consultant with more than 24 years of hands-on experience and a proven track record within the FDA regulated industry; will be the Director of this seminar. David carries an extensive regulatory and compliance background with Class I/II/III and IVD devices, pharmaceutical operations, and manages activities within the global regulatory and compliance arenas.

By attending this seminar, participants will be able to get a proper grasp of the entire registration and approval process in Japan. They will be able to identify and understand the major changes to medical device registration process in Japan. This will help them to streamline the medical device registration process, which will help them to obtain approval for their product in the most cost-effective and timely manner.

At this highly interactive session, the Director will let participants discuss their own device registration and approval process relative to their work-related responsibilities and handling submissions. This will be a very hands-on approach to helping them to review and discuss pain points, challenges and solutions.

David will cover the following areas at this seminar:

Which regulatory bodies in the Japanese government are responsible for medical device registration in Japan?

In Japan, are medical devices required to be registered before they can be sold?

What are the different regulatory classifications for medical devices?

What are the different application categories for medical device registration?

What does the registration pathway look like for each regulatory classification?

What are the document requirements for notification for the various classes of medical devices?

Walgreens, Rite Aid and CVS Health stocks each slipped 4 percent or more as investors worried Amazon may disrupt the traditional distributors’ hold on the drug prescription market.

Amazon will decide before Thanksgiving whether to move into selling prescription drugs online, according to a source and an email from Amazon viewed by CNBC.

Amazon typically spends years researching opportunities before it telegraphs its intentions. The opportunity to sell drugs online is alluring given its market size – analysts have estimated the U.S. prescription

It has been four years since the EU’s Cosmetics Product Regulation (Regulation EC No. 1223/2009), initiated in December 2009, became operational in July 2013. This regulation was considered path breaking when it was introduced because of its comprehensive nature as well as the extent of the shift it signaled from the legislation from which it took off. It was also considered extremely significant because it suggested a regulatory framework that was in alignment with the most modern technologies and methods available during the present times.

Some of the regulatory modules which are structured into the EU’s Cosmetics Product Regulation include important elements aimed at ensuring safety of cosmetic products and accountability from manufacturers, and include points such as:

– In-market control is assigned to EU Member State competent authorities

– The flow of information between countries is interlinked by the Cosmetic Product Notification Portal (CPNP), which is fed with the information by the demand for pre-market notification of cosmetic products and by ongoing cosmetovigilance procedures put in place with the respective provisions in the CPR

– The central role in cosmetovigilance applies to the Responsible Person while the access to manufacturers and responsible persons is assured by product labeling provisions

– EU and non-EU manufactures of cosmetics as well, as the suppliers of cosmetic ingredients, are required to provide data on their chemicals

– Compliance with the modules requires know-how, diligence and ongoing adjustment to state of the art of knowledge and documentation.

More challenges

In addition, the EU’s Cosmetics Product Regulation presents more challenges for manufacturers of cosmetic products that want to market to any of the countries of the EU:

The EU’s Cosmetics Product Regulation is so expansive that it represents not only the entry requirements for marketing of cosmetics product in the European Union; but is a model framework for many national legislations worldwide. These legislators are given the choice of either adopting a few parts of the EU’s Cosmetics Product Regulation’s modules, or the structure of the Regulation of its predecessor legislation, the Cosmetics Directive, in full. Therefore, companies need to have the knowledge and the skills needed for complying both with the EU’s Cosmetics Product Regulation and other regulatory frameworks.

There is yet another challenge to implementing the EU’s Cosmetics Product Regulation: The safety assessment. Complying with this part of the EU’s Cosmetics Product Regulation requires extensive knowledge and skill of a host of subjects and issues such as toxicology, chemistry, cosmetology and microbiology, apart from that of regulatory affairs and compliance management. This already tough provision has been made even tougher with the final implementation of the ban on animal testing that the EU introduced in March 2013,

As a result of this ban, considerable confusion abounds about the interpretation of the compliance regulations in the various agencies and sectors that the compliance process has to pass through. If alternative tests are carried out, they are not available for all toxicological endpoints that need assessment as part of the EU’s Cosmetics Product Regulation.

Clearing the confusions

This makes compliance with the EU’s Cosmetics Product Regulation as difficult and complicated as one can imagine. A two-day seminar from GlobalCompliancePanel, a leading provider of professional trainings for all the areas of regulatory compliance, will offer clarity on the provisions of the EU’s Cosmetics Product Regulation. The complicated parts of the regulation, namely the regulatory modules, will be given a clearer understanding.

The Director of this two-day seminar is Dr. Annelie Struessmann, who is the Technical & Regulatory Director with CONUSBAT Regulatory Services, a provider of internationalization compliance services for Cosmetics, Personal Care, Fine Chemicals and Borderline Industries.

To gain better understanding of this regulation, please visit Four years of the EU’s Cosmetics Product Regulation to enroll. This seminar has been pre-approved by RAPS as eligible for up to 12 credits towards a participant’s RAC recertification upon full completion.

At this session, Dr. Struessmann will explain the provisions of the regulatory modules and supplement this with a description of the latest developments and research results. She will use these to show pathways towards compliance, at which she will use practical examples and experiences gained in the course of performing the necessary compliance steps before and while marketing of cosmetics products in the EU.